Bernie Sanders Signals Liberal Push To End Israel’s Occupation With Two States Or One – Forward

Posted on by

At the J Street Conference on February 27, Bernie Sanders delivered one of the most intriguing Israel-related speeches an American politician has given in years. Read it carefully, and you can grasp Donald Trumps radicalizing impact on the America-Israel debate. The more Trump and his advisers question long-standing taboos by shifting right, the more Democrats will do the same by shifting left.

To understand how Sanderss speech pushes the boundaries of the Israel debate in Washington, D.C., compare it to the one John Kerry gave last December after the Obama administration abstained from a United Nations resolution criticizing settlements. In that speech, Kerry defended American policy the way Obama officials usually did: in the language of Israeli self-interest. Kerry declared, Throughout his administration, President Obama has been deeply committed to Israel and its security, and that commitment has guided his pursuit of peace in the Middle East.

Kerry discussed Palestinian rights and dignity, too. But they were a secondary theme.

Thats not how ordinary Democrats think anymore. This past January, the Pew Research Center found that, for the first time since they began asking the question in 2001, Democrats were as likely to sympathize with the Palestinians as with Israel. Sanderss speech reflected that.

Like most American politicians, he celebrated Israels war of independence. But then he did something American politicians almost never do: He acknowledged the wars impact on Palestinians. Like our own country, Sanders declared, the founding of Israel involved the displacement of hundreds of thousands of people already living there, the Palestinian people. Over 700,000 people were made refugees.

Sanderss moral parallelism continued when he left the past and moved to the present. My question here today is, Okay, what now? he continued. Where do Israelis and Palestinians go from here? What should be U.S. policy to end this conflict, to end this 50-year-long occupation, and enable a better, more secure and prosperous future for Jews and Arabs, Israelis and Palestinians alike?

For Kerry, the answer to those questions was clear: the two-state solution. In his December 2016 speech he mentioned the phrase 29 times. But Sanders didnt answer the question by talking about diplomatic agreements. He answered it by talking about the values we share as progressives. We believe in democracy. We believe in equality. We believe in pluralism. We are strongly opposed to xenophobia. We respect and we will protect the rights of minorities.

What political arrangement would best reflect those values? Sanders didnt exactly say. He acknowledged that the two-state solution has been bipartisan U.S. policy for many years and is also supported by an overwhelming international consensus. And he criticized Trump for casually suggesting that he might discard it in favor of one state.

But Sanders also peeked through the door that Trump opened. Kerry described the demise of the two-state solution as calamitous. If it dies, he insisted, Israel wont ever really be at peace.

Sanders, by contrast, was less apocalyptic than quizzical. If Palestinians in the occupied territories are to be denied self-determination in a state of their own, he asked, will they receive full citizenship and equal rights in a single state, potentially meaning the end of a Jewish majority state? These are very serious questions with significant implications for Americas broader regional partnerships and goals.

In emphasizing the values that an Israeli-Palestinian agreement must reflect rather than the two-state solution as an end in itself, Sanders again reflected a shift on the grassroots left. J Street still firmly supports two states. But the millennial-powered If Not Now, which contains many veterans of J Streets student wing, is officially agnostic on the subject. So is the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement, although one-staters are its most prominent leaders.

This shift preceded Trump, but he is accelerating it. A more conventional Republican president would have undermined the two-state solution in practice while supporting it in theory, which is what the American Jewish establishment has been doing for decades. But Trump is contemptuous or maybe just ignorant of the long-standing rhetorical conventions guiding U.S. policy toward Israel.

Hes not merely hostile to the two-state solution in practice. He and advisers like ambassador-designate David Friedman talk openly about ditching it in favor of a one-state alternative, and thus empower those on the Israeli right, like Naftali Bennett, who want to do the same. In the years to come, this will liberate Democratic politicians to think beyond two states, too. Sanderss speech is the clearest evidence yet.

The two-state solution, which I still support, requires both American conservatives and American progressives to compromise core values. The right must compromise its values of nationalism and Judeo-Christian religious authority by giving up biblically sacred land to a state populated mostly by Arab Muslims. The left must compromise its values of secularism, multiculturalism and equality by supporting two ethnically and religiously based countries.

But we do not live in an age of moral compromise. We live in an age of moral extremism. Trump is making the Republican Party more nationalistic. Democrats are responding by becoming more universalistic. Trumps Republican Party is becoming a more naked expression of white, Christian self-interest. Democrats are responding by embracing the interests of people of color more emphatically.

All this will change the American debate over Israel. For Barack Obama and John Kerry, the impending death of the two-state solution was a tragedy. The Democrats who follow them may increasingly see it as an opportunity instead.

Peter Beinart is a Forward senior columnist and contributing editor. Follow him on Twitter, @PeterBeinart

The views and opinions expressed in this article are the authors own and do not necessarily reflect those of the Forward.

See the rest here:

Bernie Sanders Signals Liberal Push To End Israel's Occupation With Two States Or One - Forward

Liberal groups want Manchin removed from Dem leadership – The Hill

Posted on by

Several liberal groups plan to deliver a petition to Senate Minority Leader Charles SchumerCharles SchumerLiberal groups want Manchin removed from Dem leadership Impact, incidence of Chinese currency controls largely overblown GOP's leaked 'repeal and replace' plan is the scorpion striking the frog MORE (D-N.Y.) Thursday morning calling on him to remove Sen. Joe ManchinJoe ManchinSessions faces growing pressure to recuse himself from Russia probe Senate advances Rick Perry to be Energy secretary Manchin: Sessions should resign if he lied about Russia contacts MORE (D-W.Va.) from party leadership.

The groups argue that Manchins lack of resistance to President Trump warrants his removal as the vice chairman of the Democratic Policy and Communications Committee.

There is no justification for Senate Democratic Leader Chuck SchumerCharles SchumerLiberal groups want Manchin removed from Dem leadership Impact, incidence of Chinese currency controls largely overblown GOP's leaked 'repeal and replace' plan is the scorpion striking the frog MORE to anoint someone as a member of Democratic leadership who consistently votes with Trumps extreme right-wing priorities, fails to defend our progressive values, and routinely collaborates with Trump by enabling his racist and fascist agenda grounded in xenophobia and hate, CREDO Action, one of the groups collecting signatures, wrote on its website.

One of the groups involved in the petition effort against Manchin, We Will Replace You, is threatening primary challenges to Democratic senators who have not committed to a full resistance of Trump's agenda.

The groups, which include We Will Replace You, Democracy for America, CREDO Action, Other98 and 350 Action, have collected more than 225,000 signatures for the Manchin petition.

We Will Replace You called for Manchin to be removed from leadership after leaked audio revealed that the senator took part in an off-the-record meeting with Breitbart News.

Activists plan to phone all of Schumers state and D.C. offices Thursday morning, as others deliver the petition to his office on Capitol Hill.

More:

Liberal groups want Manchin removed from Dem leadership - The Hill

The Liberal Redneck, Trae Crowder, Leaves Dixie for Hollywood – Forbes

Posted on by

Forbes
The Liberal Redneck, Trae Crowder, Leaves Dixie for Hollywood
Forbes
Raised by his dad in rural Tennessee, Trae Crowder's town had no streetlights. Mostly surrounded by political conservatives and the politically apathetic, Trae was liberal early on. He was poor but smart, and his dad was emphatic about him going to ...

Read the original post:

The Liberal Redneck, Trae Crowder, Leaves Dixie for Hollywood - Forbes

A field guide to our doomed liberal elite – Spectator.co.uk

Posted on by

The latest and perhaps most damaging accusation to be levelled at Donald Trump is that he likes his steaks well-done and accompanied with tomato ketchup. He was seen ordering exactly this dish last week. It would not surprise me if he also had a side order of battered onion rings.

I do not know if the person who cooked the steak was an immigrant and, this being the case, added a gobbet of alien phlegm to the griddle. If so, Trump didnt seem to mind. He chomped away, dipping bits of incinerated meat in his ketchup, quite unconcerned that over here in Blighty a new sneerfest was rapidly getting underway. The mans a monster, someone tweeted. He eats like my toddler and acts like him too, some dappy woman commented. You give your toddler steak? How does he like it? Au point with barnaise and a crisp side salad (along with the ketchup)? I think were back dealing with the liberal elite once again.

The journalist Mick Hume has just written a book about that very thing (the liberal elite, not how to eat steak) and been eviscerated for it by denizens of the, er, liberal elite. No surprise then. The book is called Revolting: How the Establishment Are Undermining Democracy And What Theyre Afraid Of and concerns itself principally with the establishment reactions to both the Brexit vote here and Trumps victory in the USA.

First to stick the boot in was some woman called Helen Lewis in the Sunday Times, who either did not understand the book or more likely wilfully misunderstood it. Then it was our own Nick Cohen, reviewing the book for the Guardian. Nick was never going to like it, because he is, first, a staunch Remainer who was appalled by the vote last June and since then has been railing with increasing fury about how were all going to hell in a handcart as a consequence of that democratic decision. On this issue hes a sort of reverse Richard Littlejohn, perpetually splenetic and beside himself.

But then, second, because he has an all-consuming loathing of the old Revolutionary Communist Party cadre who have turned themselves into entertaining anti-establishment libertarians at Spiked Online and the Institute of Ideas. The likes of Brendan ONeill, Claire Fox, Frank Furedi and indeed Mick Hume. I have a scintilla of sympathy with Nick in his animus, even though some of my closest friends are part of that contrarian post-Marxist bloc. I am never entirely sure what they are actually for even if their critiques of what they are against are pungent, often counter-intuitive and frankly very welcome.

Nick, who is also a friend and a writer I admire, made the same mistake in his furious annihilation of Hume as Lewis had made in hers. There is no liberal elite, they both insisted. It does not exist. Cohen went still further and offered Hume a short lesson in what constitutes an elite: political parties, effectively. And so, because we and the US are ruled by right-wing governments, it is ludicrous to talk of a ruling liberal elite, or a liberal establishment.

Oh dear. This is so shallow a reading of the issue that it would not even tickle your toes. So I thought, reading Nicks piece, that maybe I ought to offer a short lesson on what constitutes a real elite. Especially as I refer to it every week or so.

For a start, the elite is not liberal in the classical liberal sense, but closer to the American sense of the word. It is certainly not liberal if by that you mean tolerant: it is intolerant and authoritarian. And by elite I do not mean the elected government: establishment elites can survive most forms of government and easily outlast them.

The liberal elite we talk about today is beholden to a leftish cultural and political paradigm which predominates in all the non-elected institutions which run our lives. In the judiciary, for example. Within the BBC. In the running of our universities and in the courses they put before students. In the teaching profession. In the social services departments of every council in the land. At the top of the medical profession. On the boards of all the quangos the lot of them, from those which hand out money in the arts to those which regulate our media and our utilities. It is a left-liberal paradigm, informed by affluence, which has been swallowed whole by all of these institutions and which is utterly intolerant of dissent.

Try being a social worker who thinks gay adoptions are problematic. Or a doctor who disapproves of abortion or transitioning. Or a student who quite likes Germaine Greer and wearing a sombrero. Or a teacher who thinks Trump is maybe OK. (The headmaster at a school in south London recently told pupils that if any child uttered the same sorts of words as Donald Trump about immigration, theyd be excluded.)

Try being a judge who thinks an awful lot of hate crimes are imaginary or vexatious. In all cases youd be drummed out. No job. Youd be finished. There would be tribunals where you would be judged by other upholders of the liberal elite and youd be out.

That is what we mean by the liberal elite. The template for how our society is governed and which antithetical political parties may battle, but in the short to medium term, lose.

Elites do change, though. I remember as a speechwriter for the Labour party in the early 1980s suggesting that we do something in support of the teachers, who were complaining about pay. Fuck them theyre all Tories, I was told. And so statistically they were, at the time. And in the 1970s the BBC, the Church of England, the judiciary and the emergent quangos were small c conservative. Elites last for about two generations. Our liberal elite has lasted since about 1985. And my guess is that right now it is on the way out, which is why we are hearing this continual howling.

Link:

A field guide to our doomed liberal elite - Spectator.co.uk

Canada Post violating Liberal election promise, Edmonton woman says – CBC.ca

Posted on by

The installation of a community mailbox in her older neighbourhood violatesa Liberal election promise to reinstate door-to-door delivery, an Edmonton woman says.

Canada Post began moving fromdoor-to-door service to community mailboxesin 2015 in an effort to save money.

The Liberals campaigned on a promise to reverse the trendand in Decembera House of Commons committee recommended Canada Post maintain a freeze on the installation of community mailboxes.

But Dawne Colwell, who has lived in West Jasper Place for 25 years, claims Canada Post is not following through.

In all her time living in the neighbourhood, she's never seen a community mailbox, until last week.

West Jasper Place Civics Director Irene Blain wants to know why this community mailbox was put in her mature neighbourhood. (CBC)

"Sunday, I walked over and had a look and saw that it was community mailbox."

She called somebody fromthe community league whom she expected could tell her whatwas happening.

But news of the box also came as a surprise to civics director Irene Blain.

"The first I heard about it was when I received an email from Dawne," said Blain. "I went down there as soon as possible we drove down and sure enough it's the community Canada Post mailbox."

According to Blain, there was no public announcement prior to the installation of thecommunity box.

"I find it very deceptive for this to be just plopped in the neighbourhood,"Blain said.

Canada Post say the new community mailbox will serve four addresses including this infill under construction. (CBC)

"I really don't know if the Liberals know that this is happening. We really need to get to the bottom of it."

The community box in West Jasper Place isinstalled outside an infill development and Blain believes Canada Post may have used a loophole in its policy.

"It states something about all areas with new developments shall be served by community mailboxes," said Blain.

"Well they're looking at any new development and that's a way of it coming into a mature neighbourhood; as long as it's adjacent to a brand new development that's under construction."

But in an email to the CBC, Canada Post spokesperson Darcia Kmet said there is no loophole.

"It has been Canada Post's practice and process since community mailboxes were introduced more than 30 years ago to provide new housing developments with community mailboxes for their mode of mail delivery," she said.

"This includes most infill developments where multiple addresses replace one previous address. The new community mailbox near the corner of 155st StreetNW and 97th AvenueNW will serve the new four addresses for the homes being built."

Blain calls the responseridiculous.

"If in fact these mailboxes are going to be for the new builds and all the other houses that are currently receiving door-to-door delivery will continue to have door-to-door delivery, what kind of sense does that make?"

Colwell says there are good reasons to keep the mailboxes out of their community.

"There's a lot of litter and there can be vandalism and people can slip on the ice. It's not something I really want in my neighbourhood."

Read the original:

Canada Post violating Liberal election promise, Edmonton woman says - CBC.ca

Excess rules stifle freedom – The Robesonian

Posted on by

Its no surprise that N.C. legislators might disagree about regulatory reforms that make substantive changes to state policies. Some might prefer larger development buffers or more frequent inspections. Plans to scrap a controversial rule can lead to heated debate.

But the proposed Regulatory Reform Act filed as Senate Bill 131 reminds us that at least some of the thrust of regulatory reform deals less with policy choices than with overly burdensome paperwork.

More than 5,400 of the roughly 10,000 words in the current version of the bill address elimination and consolidation of reports. If lawmakers adopt the bill in its current form, they would eliminate an annual report on mining tied to a 1971 Mining Act. They would stop forcing the N.C. Department of Administration to prepare an annual report on implementation of the Sustainable Energy-Efficient Buildings Program. They would eliminate a required annual report on fish kills in the state. The list goes on.

To be clear, none of these changes would affect any laws or rules that target mining, energy efficiency in buildings, or activities that lead to fish kills. The only change is the required report to state lawmakers.

That means time government workers now spend preparing reports that lawmakers no longer need could be spent on other more substantive regulatory work. Perhaps the state might even see some cost savings from eliminating jobs devoted only to preparing outdated or unnecessary reports.

Certainly, eliminating or consolidating dozens of government reports sounds less exciting than cutting residents tax bills or expanding parental choices in education. But regulatory reform in general holds great potential for boosting the North Carolina economy.

That was a key message state senators heard last week from authors of the Cato Institutes Freedom in the 50 States report. The Tar Heel State ranks No. 19 in overall freedom in the latest report. Its No. 26 ranking in regulatory freedom offers the best potential for major gains.

Eliminating paperwork is unlikely on its own to move the needle on regulatory freedom. But the exercise fits well with an overall approach to rules and regulations that challenges the status quo.

Its the same type of approach that has helped North Carolina find success in another recent regulatory reform: the formal review of almost 20,000 state rules. Lawmakers approved the idea in 2013. With the process less than half complete, reviewers have targeted more than 1,000 rules (12 percent of those examined to date) to head to the proverbial scrap heap.

That percentage could climb if lawmakers support the Rules Review Commission chairmans proposal to change the review process. He wants to eliminate a review option that now allows an existing state rule to escape extensive scrutiny if regulators determine that it is both necessary and noncontroversial. To date, more than 60 percent of rules subject to review have secured that designation. That loophole would disappear if lawmakers choose to pursue RRC recommendations.

2016 marked the first year since Republicans took control of both chambers of the General Assembly that they reached no agreement on a broad regulatory reform agenda. Even a last-ditch effort to consider reforms during a special December legislative session fell short.

As reformers consider SB131 and other potential regulatory ideas this year, they might want to consider the words of Jason Sorens, co-author of the Cato report and program director of the Political Economy Project at Dartmouth College.

What we find is that Americans do, in fact, vote for freedom, and they vote for it looks like all elements of freedom: fiscal, regulatory, and personal. Each of these is statistically correlated with net in-migration from other states. In other words, people are moving from less free states to freer states.

Freedom generates other tangible benefits. Freedom is valuable for its own sake, but its also valuable because it impacts a lot of things we care about like economic growth and whether businesses are moving into a state or out of a state, said William Ruger, Sorens co-author and a vice president at the Charles Koch Institute.

Yet another reason why regulatory reform, in all its forms, remains a worthwhile pursuit.

http://robesonian.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/web1_kokai.jpg

Mitch Kokai is senior political analyst for the John Locke Foundation.

.

Read the original here:

Excess rules stifle freedom - The Robesonian

Pakistan ranked ahead India in Economic Freedom Index report … – ARY NEWS

Posted on by

Pakistan has been ranked two points ahead of India in theIndex of Economic Freedom 2017published by Washingtons No. 1 think tank, The Heritage Foundation, which measures the principles of economic freedom and progress.

Economic freedom is the fundamental right of every human to control his or her own labor and property brings greater prosperity. In an economically free society, individuals are free to work, produce, consume, and invest, and governments allow labor, capital, and goods to move freely, and refrain from coercion or constraint of liberty.

Pakistan is ranked at 141 out of a total 180 countries, while India is ranked at 143. However, both countries are ranked in the Mostly Unfree category.

The reports states that Pakistan has pursued reforms to improve its entrepreneurial environment and facilitate private-sector development. The financial sector has undergone modernisation and restructuring while progress in improving the entrepreneurial environment has been modest.

However, overall progress lags significantly behind other countries in the region. The tax system is complex and inefficient despite reforms to broaden the tax base and increase transparency, wile unstable democracy and threat of terrorism have made the businessoperating environment more challenging in recent years.

Furthermore, it states the judicial system of Pakistan suffers from a serious backlog, and corruption continues to taint the civil service, while excessive state involvement in the economy and restrictions on foreign investment are serious drags on economic dynamism.

The index states that India is a significant force in world trade but corruption, underdeveloped infrastructure, and poor management of public finance continue to undermine overall development

In India growth is not deeply rooted in policies that preserve economic freedom while progress on market-oriented reforms has been uneven and a restrictive regulatory environment discourages entrepreneurship.

According to the according to the editors of the Index, the world economy is moderately free with another rise in economic liberty leading to a fifth annual global increase. Among the 180 countries ranked, scores improved for 103 countries and declined for 73 (16 of which recorded their lowest Index scores ever).

The world average score of 60.9 is the highest recorded in the 23-year history of the Index. Forty-nine countries, the majority of which are developing countries, achieved their highest-ever Index scores.

Hong Kong and Singapore were ranked first and second in the rankings, while five other frequent top 10 finishers New Zealand (3rd globally), Switzerland (4th), Australia (5th), Estonia (6th) and Canada also improved their scores.

A surprise newcomer to the top 10, the United Arab Emirates took the 8th spot. Ireland (9th) and Chile (10th) saw their scores dip but still managed to round out the global top 10 ranking.

The Index of Economic Freedom documents the positive relationship between economic freedom and a variety of positive social and economic goals.

The ideals of economic freedom are strongly associated with healthier societies, cleaner environments, greater per capita wealth, human development, democracy, and poverty elimination.

Launched in 1995, the Index evaluates countries in four broad policy areas that affect economic freedom: rule of law, government size, regulatory efficiency and open markets.

There are twelve specific categories: property rights, judicial effectiveness, government integrity, tax burden, government spending, fiscal health, business freedom, labor freedom, monetary freedom, trade freedom, investment freedom, and financial freedom.

Each of the twelve economic freedoms within these categories is graded on a scale of 0 to 100. A countrys overall score is derived by averaging these twelve economic freedoms, with equal weight being given to each.

comments

Visit link:

Pakistan ranked ahead India in Economic Freedom Index report ... - ARY NEWS

Wake Up, Republicans: This Could Be the Democrats’ Tea Party – POLITICO Magazine

Posted on by

As someone who was intimately involved in supporting Tea Party activists in 2009, I feel like Ive entered Bizarro World.

A re-energized wave of liberal activists is crashing down across the nation. Democrats are celebrating disruptive protesters at congressional town hall forums, lauding them as living exemplars of the best traditions of American participatory democracyflesh-and-blood versions of Norman Rockwells Freedom of Speech painting. Everywhere, people are marching, protesting, tweeting, [and] speaking out, cheered Hillary Clinton in a new video released by the Democratic National Committee. Let resistance plus persistence equal progress.

Story Continued Below

For many Republicans, their new roles in this episode are equally upside down. Members of Congress are skipping out on public events, afraid of catching the wrath of angry voters. Several GOP elected officials have alleged that the protesters are not actual constituents, but outside agitators paid by wealthy liberalspeople to be ignored, not engaged with. President Donald Trump himself questioned the legitimacy of so-called angry crowds, tweeting that they are planned out by liberal activists. Marco Rubio, who first won election to the U.S. Senate in the Tea Party wave of 2010, has defended his own decision to avoid such town halls, arguing that attendees will heckle and scream at me in front of cameras.

What a difference eight years makes.

Back in 2009, it was impossible to find a single Democratic apparatchik willing to acknowledge the legitimacy of citizen participation in congressional town halls. Representative Lloyd Doggett of Texas dismissed frustrated voters as a mob part of a coordinated, nationwide effort. Then-Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi described Tea Party protesters not as grass-roots Americans, but as artificial Astroturf. After a glut of protests at town hall events in August 2009, she even went so far as to co-author a USA Today op-ed in which she smeared the demonstrators tactics as un-American. Organizing for America, Barack Obamas campaign machine-turned-advocacy group, outrageously labeled Tea Party members right-wing domestic terrorists who are subverting the American democratic process.

Improbable as it seems, the hysterical reactions from the left about robust citizen participation in the democratic process in 2009 almost make Trumps tweets circa 2017 seem downright reasonable. As Jerry Seinfeld once described it: Up is down, and down is up.

In 2009, I served as the head of FreedomWorks, where I helped to support and organize Tea Party activists. I know something about town-hall protesters. And I have some tough news for both parties. The Tea Party was real, not astroturf, we were not a mob, and we were certainly not domestic terrorists.

Likewise, the Womens March in January and the current flood of town-hall protests are equally real, and should not be dismissed or diminished. Citizens exercising their poweras long as they dont hurt people or infringe on others rightsis always a positive thing. Indeed, its one of the primary tools Americans have to hold the government accountable.

If it looks like chaos, I call it beautiful chaos. We are in the middle of a political paradigm shift that is giving access to knowledge and power back to end users. Citizens have more say today, and social media and other technologies make it easier to educate others about the issues and organize.

Welcome to the new normal in American politics.

***

Todays progressive town-hall protesters follow in a tradition of disrupting the old top-down status quoone that stretches back across the political spectrum, ranging from Howard Dean to Ron Paul to the Tea Party, and yes, even Donald Trump.

That said, there are some important differences between Tea Party and todays activists, and I think these distinctions will ultimately undermine the ability of todays protests to evolve into a social movement with real electoral consequences.

First, this movement feels strictly partisan, and many of the groups supporting the protesters have strictly partisan goals. Indivisible, the group bootstrapping a training manual on town hall disruption based on Tea Party tactics, is helmed by Democratic operatives. Several of the authors are, in fact, former staffers of Doggett. Likewise, the Center for American Progress, the Service Employees International Union, and Organizing for Action (President Obamas community-organizing operation formerly known as Organizing for America) are all involved, often with paid community organizers on the ground.

At FreedomWorks, we provided much of the same type of support: training, organizing, and providing logistical backing. Although we were savaged at the time as Astroturf, these wereand arelegitimate functions. But there is an important difference between advancing partisan political goals and advocating an ideological agenda.

Though my friends on the left may not realize this, they ignore it at their own peril: The Tea Party wasnt a partisan movement, especially in 2009 and 2010. Critics of the Tea Party forget (or ignore) the origins of our frustrations. At the massive Taxpayer March on Washington on September 12, 2009, every single activist I spoke with cited President George W. Bushs Wall Street bailout as their primary motive for getting involved. They would recite back to me his infamous rationale: I abandoned free-market principles to save the free-market system. Thats what got folks off the couch and organizing. We were ideologues in 2009, and our shared philosophy bound us as a movement.

We targeted Republicans and Democrats with equal zeal, because, as our battle cry made clear at the time, we had to beat the Republicans before we could beat the Democrats. By contrast, todays protesters seem to be strictly targeting Republican town halls instead of making Democratic members of Congress feel the heat, too.

Second, its hard to find a focused, unifying set of issues or principles that connect todays Democratic protesters. Most seem motivated solely by Donald Trumps victory in November. But being anti-Trump is not enough: Even if they wanted to, Republicans in Congress cant really do anything about this. Are the disruptions today about the electoral process? Russia? Immigration? Health care? LGBT rights? One of the myriad other issues that seem to be drawing activists out? I cant tell. They will need to find unified principles and a cause.

The Tea Party, almost to a person, was unified on the principles of individual freedom, fiscal responsibility, and constitutionally limited government. Our policy agenda flowed from that: opposition to bailouts, deficit spending and government control of health care.

Third, if protesters want their cause to reach independents and disaffected Republicans (there are likely plenty), they had better keep it civil and respectful. Tea Partyers certainly got rowdy at the 2009 town halls, but they also came prepared, many having read and shared the contents of the health-care legislation that Pelosi had posted online. Surprising as it may be to some on the left, at FreedomWorks gatherings of Tea Party organizers, we were assigning readings about Mahatma Gandhi, Dr. Martin Luther King, and other successful nonviolent social movements. Violence can kill your cause, and we did our best to police our own community. Fair or not, todays protesters will own the worst behavior associated with their efforts.

Just shouting down members of Congressor in the case of one recent town hall in Louisiana, booing both the Pledge of Allegiance and the chaplain offering an opening prayer wont play well with anyone you need to win over. Not all protesters are the same and most are real people with real frustrations, but all protesters will be tarred by the actions of the worst among the group. Try to show a little respect, and it will be more effective.

Republicans are making a big mistake if they dismiss or ignore this movement. Contra the political mythology, the Tea Party was far more independent than Republican, and that translated into a broader coalition when coupled with the existing GOP vote. Today, the same battle rages for the hearts and minds of independents and Republicans uneasy with Trumps rhetoric.

So, a little advice to Republican elected officials: Dont avoid town halls. In fact, schedule more of them, like Representative Justin Amash has done. Listen. Hear your constituents. Defend your positions. Dont abandon the promises you made to voters in the election. If needed, provide for security at the event so that all citizens feel safe. Set up a system where everyone gets a chance to speak and to hear your response. Answer democratic engagement with more democratic engagement.

I realize how difficult this all may be in practice, but I agree with former Democratic Representative Gabby Giffords: Have some courage. Face your constituents. Hold town halls. Democrats failed that test in 2009 and 2010. Republicans run the risk of making the same mistake in 2017.

Matt Kibbe is president and chief community organizer of Free the People, and a senior editor at CRTV. He is the author of Dont Hurt People and Dont Take Their Stuff: A Libertarian Manifesto.

View post:

Wake Up, Republicans: This Could Be the Democrats' Tea Party - POLITICO Magazine

Who is the enemy? – Emporia Gazette

Posted on by

I am part Text ColorSwatch/NoneStrokeStyle/$ID/SolidText ColorSwatch/NoneStrokeStyle/$ID/Solid$ID/NothingText ColorText Color$ID/NothingText ColorText Colorof Text ColorSwatch/NoneStrokeStyle/$ID/SolidText ColorSwatch/NoneStrokeStyle/$ID/Solid$ID/NothingText ColorText Color$ID/NothingText ColorText Colora profession recently designated an Enemy of the People.

Its a chilling phrase, used by despots throughout history to justify the limitation of free speech, the imprisonment and even murder of those who speak anyway.

Id like to share this quote from David Remnick of The New Yorker (Feb. 18):

Joel Simon, the executive director of the Committee to Protect Journalists, makes the point that autocrats from Chvez to Erdogan, Sisi to Mugabe, all follow a general pattern. They attack and threaten the press with deliberate and ominous intensity; the press, in turn, adopts a more oppositional tone and role. And then that paves the way for the autocrats next move, Simon told me. Popular support for the media dwindles and the leader starts instituting restrictions. Its an old strategy.

However McCarthyism aside it is new to the land of the free, the home of the brave.

Does America have enemies? Sure. Within and without. But you cannot paint the entire media profession with one brush.

Its not all fake news. Its not fake news just because you dont like it. Think it through. Would you trust Breitbart over PBS? Occupy Democrats over the Associated Press?

With a nod to Mike Wilson, editor of the Dallas Morning News, who first wrote on this ...

An enemy of the people wrote a three-part feature on beloved restaurant Olpe Chicken House. An enemy of the people revealed a serious case of theft at a beloved, taxpayer-supported institution.

An enemy of the people spent a day with a law enforcement officer to give the community a better idea of what our protectors face.

An enemy of the people wrote about the need for food, clothes and a place to take a shower for students at Emporia High School.

An enemy of the people questioned the fiscal need for yet another community survey. An enemy of the people talked to hometown hero Clint Bowyer so you could keep up with his career.

Enemies of the people routinely contribute articles to The Gazette on fiscal health, physical health, spiritual health.

Am I your enemy? I hope not. Freedom of speech and freedom of the press is vital to our nation.

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out

Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out

Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out

Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak for me.

The Rev. Martin Niemoller, 1892-1984. 1937 1945 interred at Sachsenhausen and Dachau

Regina Murphy

Features Editor

Here is the original post:

Who is the enemy? - Emporia Gazette

The Staggering Costs of Operating Air Force One – The Fiscal Times

Posted on by

The Fiscal Times
The Staggering Costs of Operating Air Force One
The Fiscal Times
According to a Freedom of Information Act request filed by Judicial Watch, the VC-25A cost a whopping $206,000 an hour to operate during a 2014 trip to Los Angeles by President Barack Obama. According to the documents, this figure included fuel, flight ...

and more »

Read the rest here:

The Staggering Costs of Operating Air Force One - The Fiscal Times

How a Tenet of GOP Orthodoxy Slipped Away – Roll Call

Posted on by

Nothing President Donald Trump said in his first speech to Congress, and nothing visible on this years budget battle horizon, will change the grim realities of the long-range federal fiscal forecast.

Trump continues to sound like hes out to refashion the Republicans as populist protectors of elderly Americans and their expansive government safety net, and GOP leaders on the Hill newly sound like they arent going to do anything to stand in his way. That represents a fundamental retreat from three decades of party orthodoxy, which could revive the sort of ballooning annual deficits long derided by Republicans as the enemy of national economic stability.

This has nothing to do with the 10 percent increase in military spending Trump is advocating, which hed pay for by cutting an equivalent $54 billion from education, the environment and other domestic programs.

That headline-inducing trade-off already looks dead on arrival at the Capitol the boost rejected by defense hawks as too timid and the nonmilitary cuts spurned by lawmakers in both parties as impractically draconian. But at least the simplistic equation had the virtue of neutrality toward the budgetary bottom line.

Not so the all-but-formalized decision by the Trump administration to propose no changes whatsoever for Medicare, Social Security, veterans benefits and the other big entitlements. These are otherwise known as mandatory programs because the government is mandated to cover whatever the beneficiaries are entitled based on formulas and eligibility rules that Congress is under no obligation to revisit each year.

Just as he never mentioned North Korea or Russia, two of the nations most nettlesome overseas adversaries, in his address Tuesday night, neither did he say a word about entitlements, which are a comparably vexing and enormous challenge domestically.

Thats because they already combine to account for three-fifths of the budget, and that is twice as much as the $1.2 trillion being spent this year on discretionary programs, from the Pentagon to the arts agencies, which are subject to annual appropriations decisions. (The rest is interest on the national debt.)

Thanks mainly to the aging baby-boom population, annual entitlements will grow by almost $500 billion, or 18 percent, just during this presidential term unless Congress and Trump come up with a plan to curtail the outlays. Just 10 years from now, entitlements will have mushroomed 73 percent more than currently, cresting $4.3 trillion. That will be almost two-thirds of the entire federal budget, and also almost triple what the appropriators have to allocate assuming a continuation in the very slow pace of recent growth in discretionary spending.

And unless taxes are increased along the way which both Trump and the GOP Congress remain unalterably resistant to the cost of doing nothing about entitlements will quickly grow stark. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office projected last month the annual deficit will rise from $560 billion this year to $1 trillion in six years and $1.4 trillion in 2027, which would equal 5 percent of the economy. And the cumulative effect of those steadily widening budget imbalances would mean adding $10 trillion to the national debt in the next decade, the CBO estimates.

Such dramatic trend lines are nothing new, but they do get slightly more alarming each time another year passes without any legislation to slow or shallow the trajectories which would happen, perhaps dramatically, depending on how deeply entitlement benefits got curbed or how much eligibility was limited.

By remaining silent on that score, Trump is absolutely staying true to his campaign promise to keep Medicare, Social Security and Medicaid just as they are.

The much more newsworthy silence comes from Speaker Paul D. Ryan, whose rapid rise from young Wisconsin backbencher to the principal policy playmaker in the House was fueled by a passionate advocacy for entitlement curbs, which he views as the central ingredient for balancing the budget, and creating a new era of national fiscal health.

This is a once-in-a-generation moment, Ryan said Tuesday of the legislative year ahead, because the first entirely Republican power structure in Washington in a decade creates the opportunity to finally tackle big problems that have held us back for so long.

But the roster of a half-dozen topics he then enumerated made no mention of corralling the growth of entitlements. Asked if that meant the issue had been dropped for the year, the speaker quipped I never give up a dream and took no more questions at his news conference.

He told some other reporters during the day that he believes Trump might still be someday persuaded to limiting Medicare and Social Security for people who retire in the future because if you dont start bending the curve in the out years, we are hosed. But that night, Ryan nonetheless labeled Trumps speech a home run, and to be sure, the president did come close to endorsing Ryans plan for taxing imports and embraced the House GOP leaderships framework for replacing the 2010 health care law.

Still, Ryans apparent willingness to back away from the central crusade of his congressional career is further evidence of his awkward position in the capital power structure of 2017.

Having criticized Trumps temperament and ideology repeatedly during the campaign, without ever flatly repudiating him, while at the same time enduring regular putdowns from the GOP nominee for having focused on fiscal austerity and then losing as the vice presidential candidate of 2012, Ryan is not in the best position to wage a war for the Republican Partys philosophical soul. The president is the de facto head of his political party, no matter how improbable his victory or how low his initial approval ratings.

So if Trump sticks with his unusual recipe of nationalism and economic populism as a replacement for fiscal discipline and a smaller social safety net as the pillars of GOP orthodoxy, for now Ryan and the rest of the party hierarchy in Congress have little choice except to get with the program or get castigated by the partys base forundermining their top commander.

Many Republicans on the Hill had been counting on two of their own now in the Cabinet White House budget director Mick Mulvaney, previously a House Freedom Caucus stalwart from South Carolina, and Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price, a Georgian who was previously the House Budget Committee chairman to successfully sell Trump on the notion that pushing entitlement restraint in the name of long-term government solvency would be an important way to cement an economic legacy.

Although the first written outline of Trumps initial budget wont be delivered to the Capitol for two weeks, his opening preview and his first congressional address have made clear that argument did not get very far.

Get breaking news alerts and more from Roll Call on your iPhone or your Android.

Read more:

How a Tenet of GOP Orthodoxy Slipped Away - Roll Call

Sealand Natural Resources, Inc. (OTCMKTS:SLNR) Files An 8-K Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities – Market Exclusive

Posted on by
Sealand Natural Resources, Inc. (OTCMKTS:SLNR) Files An 8-K Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities
Market Exclusive
Sealand Natural Resources, Inc. is a research and new product development company. The Company is engaged in the manufacture, distribution, sales and marketing of various natural functional beverages, nutriceuticals and health supplements, and the ...

Originally posted here:

Sealand Natural Resources, Inc. (OTCMKTS:SLNR) Files An 8-K Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities - Market Exclusive

Global Camping Toilet Market 2017 By Manufacturers Zodi, Camco, SeaLand, Thetford Marine – NetDugout

Posted on by

Global Camping Toilet Market Research Report

Camping Toilet Market

The MRS Research Group Camping Toilet report by QY Research represents an inclusive evaluation of the Camping Toilet Market and comprises considerable insights, historical data, facts,and statistical and industry-validated data of the global market.Additionally,it consists of estimated data that is evaluated with the help of suitable set of methodologies and assumptions.The MRS Research Group report research highlights informative data and in-depth analysis of Camping Toilet market and its corresponding segments that are based on technology,geography, and applications.The report comprises precise information, comprehensive analysis in two ways qualitative and quantitative industry experts inputs, and information provided by industry analysts and industry participants involved in the entire value chain.The report highlights exhaustive study of major market and their present trends,along with corresponding market segments.

Read Sample Research Report @ http://www.mrsresearchgroup.com/report/97637#request-sample

The Camping Toilet report also provides data regarding various market factors and their impact on the overall market and its segments.Every market segment of the Camping Toilet industry is analyzed in a quantitative as well as qualitative way in order to provide the customers with a relative estimation of the global market. Essential information such as definition, the industry value chain and its analysis, and the trends are also explored in the MRS Research Group Camping Toilet report.This Camping Toilet report is an in-depth market research report in this domain.The report focuses on regional as well as global market,its key players,along with market segments including detailed study on various divisions and its applications.The report provides comprehensive information on each and every segment covered of the Camping Toilet market.The research report analyzes the scope of Camping Toilet industry including size, share, analysis, sales, supply, production, definition, specification, classification, demands, application, forecast trends, industry policy, and news.

This report studies Camping Toilet in Global market Ozark Trail Coleman Stansport Reliance Emergency Essentials Texsport Outdoor Shower Company Dometic Sanitation Zodi Camco

Market Segment by Regions North America China Europe Japan Southeast Asia India

Split by Product Types General Style Concise Style

Highlights of the report:

A complete backdrop analysis, which includes an assessment of the parent market. Important changes in market dynamics. Market segmentation up to the second or third level. Historical, current, and projected size of the market from the standpoint of both value and volume. Reporting and evaluation of recent industry developments. Market shares and strategies of key players. Emerging niche segments and regional markets.

Inquiry For Buying Report @ http://www.mrsresearchgroup.com/report/97637#inquiry-for-buying

ARVEL BRISTOL as Marketing Manager at Mrs Research Group design and deliver marketing programs, also responsible for analyzing the potential of marketing plans. also handling International Sales, Client Engagement, Business Development, International Marketing, Brand Building etc.

Continued here:

Global Camping Toilet Market 2017 By Manufacturers Zodi, Camco, SeaLand, Thetford Marine - NetDugout

JUSTIN JOHNSON: It’s a TRAP! – SCNow

Posted on by

All my bags are packed. Im ready to go.

Oh, let me tell you where were going:

Yeah,that2MASS J23062928-0502285, the only-39.5-light-years-away dwarf star that NASA technically revealed in 2016 but re-revealed last week.

Its a dwarf star, but not just any stupid regular-type dwarf star.

Its classified as an ultracool dwarf star. Like,so dope.

And not dope like Dopey, Dwarf Star 1-of-7. Like, dope likeultracool.

I bet youll find 2MASS J23062928-0502285 kicked back against the bleachers after school.

Leather jacket. Motorcycle.

Wait, thats not ultracool. Thats retrocool.

Ultracool like a modern tech kid with good hair and rolled skinny jeans and high-tops.

Yeah, like someone who used to shop at American Apparel before they became woke and spoke out against the companys practices.

Now theyre concerned about political issues, butnot like, political, you know?

That kind of ultracool dwarf star.

2MASS J23062928-0502285 even goes by an ultra-cool name: TRAPPIST-1, in all-caps like its an acronym, but it isnt an acronymcause thats its name, man, but technically it is the telescope they used to find it is the Transiting Planets and Planetesimals Small Telescope ... I dont know where the I comes from.

There is an I in Planetesimals, so maybe there.

But anyway, thats where Im going.

Well ...nearTRAPPIST-1. You cant live there.

Its a star, dummy. Youd get all burnt up.

But it does have seven planets orbiting it. Four of those seven were just found a couple weeks ago, and five of those seven are roughly the same size as Earth, and three of those seven might be able to support life.

See, weve effectively destroyed our planet, because humans are jerks.

And Earth is actively trying to shake us off. We are absolute parasites, killing our host.

So more and more, globes are warming and earths are quaking and canes are hurriing and nadoes are toring and Im looking to get out while the gettins good.

Where better than TRAPPALACHIA-1 itself?

There arent any planets other than Earth in our solar system that we know can support life.

Maybe Mars, but Mars kinda sucks. I sawThe Martian. Thats a lot of red dust to deal with.

So maybe the right planet for me and us is TRAPPIST-1f or maybe TRAPPIST-1g or maybe TRAPPIST-1h. One of those three Earth-like spots. We can start fresh (First up? Changing those lazy names).

Well gather up the best people (who I havent gathered yet) to load up the space shuttle (which I havent acquired yet) with gear and supplies (which havent acquired yet) and well ship out.

Based on our current tech, itll only take us 1,469,400 years to get to TRAPSVEGAS-1.

Drops in the bucket of time, am I right?

Thats actually a butt-ton of time, so maybe we need a loophole.

Look, Ive seenInterstellar. AND Ive seenGravity.

So you can just shut up. I know what Im talking about.

But even with all of this figured outtechnically, theres still the issue of the hardest part of all of this:

How do we manage the humans heading for the new utopia?

Ive seen enough science fiction movies to know that human nature is the worst part of nature, because either someone gets spacecrazy and stabs someone else or someone gets infected by some extraterrestrial somethingorother and then bites a face off or someone decides they can fix the ship and gets snatched out into nothingness or someone lets an alien monster onto the ship by accident which then proceeds to just eat everyone, and thats just a short list.

These are all things that could or could not happen on our trip to NEWTRAPCITY-1.

Not to mention all the problems thatll come up once we get there, like deciding what form of government we should use, or what the best way to grow food is, or how we plan to hunt, or how to avoid being killed by the people or creatures already living there, and you know what this seems like a ton of work after a million-and-a-half years of traveling.

Mars doesnt look so bad now.

Justin Johnson is content editor at the Morning News.

He hopes Reeses Peanut Butter Cups exist elsewhere in the universe.

View post:

JUSTIN JOHNSON: It's a TRAP! - SCNow

Dr. John to headline Utopia Fest in final year at Four Sisters Ranch … – austin360 (blog)

Posted on by

Dr John performing during the NOLA, Texas Food & Music Festival at Cedar Park Center on April 3, 2016. Suzanne Cordeiro for American-Statesman, 2016.

New Orleans music legend Dr. John has been tapped to headline this years Utopia Fest, a small-scale music and camping festival that kicks off its ninth year on September 24, 2017. Afrobeat all-stars Antibalas and funk band Lettuce also share top billing on a lineup that also includes excellent Austin artists Matthew Logan Vasquez, Capyac, Mobley, the Deer and Suzanna Choffel.

From its onset, Utopia Fest, located at the idyllic Four Sisters Ranch , seven miles outside Utopia, Texas and a little less than three hours from Austin, has differentiated itself from other outdoor music festivals by keeping the event deliberately small, with a capped attendance of 2000. This years event will be the final go round at the ranch before the festival relocates for next years tenth anniversary.

On Wednesday, festival reps said the reason for the move was to ease the strain on the land and the family and open up some new opportunities for the festival in year 10.

In 2018, we will begin the next phase in a place that will preserve the UTOPiAn spirit and vibe, and will foster long term sustainability, fest founder Travis Sutherland said in a statement. The core values and elements of the fest: quality, affordability, interaction with nature, and intimacy, will never change.

Three-day passes to the fest are on sale now for $159.

Like Loading...

Previous

Weekend music picks: Cilantro Boombox, Against Me!, Son Volt andmore

Next

Depeche Mode to play Austin360 Amphitheater inSeptember

Read the original:

Dr. John to headline Utopia Fest in final year at Four Sisters Ranch ... - austin360 (blog)

Stellaris Utopia Gameplay Expansion Out In April – Attack of the Fanboy

Posted on by

We recently learned that Paradox Interactives Stellaris would be getting its first gameplay expansion called Utopia soon, and today the developer has announced the official pricing and release date. The Utopia expansion will launch on April 6th and costs $19.99.

This expansion is set to add many things to the game, which centers around the new Utopia that vastly improves your tools to develop your empire. Utopia is the first major expansion for Stellaris, the critically acclaimed science fiction grand strategy game from Paradox Development Studio. As the title suggests, Utopia gives you new tools to develop your galactic empire and keep your people (or birdfolk or talking mushrooms) happy. Push your species further out into the galaxy with new bonuses for rapid exploration or stay closer to home before striking out against all who would challenge you.

The following is a rundown of the changes that will be coming to the game as a result of the Utopia expansion:

Megastructures:Build wondrous structures in your systems including Dyson Spheres and ring worlds, bringing both prestige and major advantages to your race.

Habitat Stations:Build tall and establish space stations that will house more population, serving the role of planets in a small and confined empire.

Traditions:Collect Unity points and adopt ideas and bonuses that will ease your species expansion across the stars, unlocking special perks for completing a set.

Rights and Privileges:Set specific policies for which of the many species under your thumb will have the rights and privileges of full citizenship.

Stellaris is available exclusively for PC, and you can check out the new Utopia Path to Ascension release date reveal trailer below. The game has been very successful for developer Paradox Interactive so far, with the developer revealing last year that it had the most successful launch out of any game they have ever developed.

Follow this link:

Stellaris Utopia Gameplay Expansion Out In April - Attack of the Fanboy

Otago student wins Oceania scholarship – Otago Daily Times

Posted on by

Former Waitaki Girls' High School pupil Tara Willans (18) has been awarded the 2017 Oceania Dairy scholarship.

She will receive an annual payment of $3000 for up to three years, plus the opportunity for paid work experience at Oceania's milk factory near Glenavy during study breaks.

Tara is starting a bachelor of arts and science majoring in politics and environmental management, with a minor in accounting, at the University of Otago.

''We had more applications this year than any other year we have been doing this,'' Oceania Dairy general manager Roger Usmar said.

''The decision was made more difficult by the high calibre of submissions and we wish to thank all candidates for the amount of time and work they put into their applications.''

The scholarship was fitting recognition of Tara's hard work, he said.

''Tara is an outstanding young woman. Not only has she achieved excellence in both NCEA level 2 and level 3, but she demonstrated strong leadership skills within her school and community.

''In addition to this she has shown exceptional humanitarian skills by working as a volunteer with youth in Cambodia and India. Not many young people would give up their summer to teach English and promote environmental sustainability.''

Tara was interviewed for the scholarship via Skype during her six weeks in India, where she was living with a local family and teaching maths and cultural studies in their privately owned school. She learned she had won the scholarship by email.

Tara is the first female recipient. Last year's winner was former Waimate High School head boy Tayne MacMillan, and the 2015 winner was another former Waimate head boy, Dion Batchelor.

''Having our scholarship students working with us over their semester breaks is important to us,'' Mr Usmar said. ''We all really enjoy having them back and seeing their confidence and maturity develop. They are an integral part of our company and are valued members of the Oceania Dairy team.''

The scholarship was a significant part of Oceania's commitment to the communities in which it operated, he said.

''We are encouraging an organisational culture of investing in people and supporting local communities. We can think of no better way of demonstrating that culture by supporting young people as they move from secondary school education to further education or training.''

The Oceania Scholarship is available to young people in the Waimate and Waitaki districts who are completing their secondary schooling and moving into further education or training that can lead to a career in the dairy industry or enhance relationships between New Zealand and China. Oceania Dairy is owned by Inner Mongolia Yili Industrial Group, China's biggest dairy company and the world's 10th-largest.

-By Sally Brooker

Go here to read the rest:

Otago student wins Oceania scholarship - Otago Daily Times

Are we living in an Orwellian Oceania? – Palatinate

Posted on by

By Anna Ley

Trumps ascendance to presidency appears to have driven dystopian literature to new heights, from Huxley to Burgess to Zamyatin, whose glass encased one-state society captures the transparency of just how futile the Communist regime was, consolidating an increasing public realisation of the hollow hyperbole of current political language, such as Trumps declaration as the greatest creator of jobs since God.

But it was the again-bestseller, Orwells Nineteen Eighty-Four, that specifically skyrocketed in sales. Trumps own adviser, Kellyanne Conways description of alternative facts resonates, with frightful familiarity, with the vacuum of knowledge that is the memory hole of Orwells Oceania in which inconvenient news is strained from our memories with a state controlled suction exerted by the Ministry of Thought. Trumps speeches carry the rhythms of Orwellian newspeak, Black is White, 2+2=5, War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, Ignorance is Strength which is defined as ambiguous euphemistic language used chiefly in political propaganda. Its very adoption into our language as a homophone for Kellyannes notion of alternative fact suggests an increasing awareness of the dangers Orwell posed.

At the core of Orwells narrative is the notion of an engineered English language, a vocabulary that is manipulated to not extend but to diminish the range of thought as Orwell himself states. Through the concept of Newspeak, Oceanias language, the state is able to strip back the terms of the dictionary deemed undesirable to Big Brother and consequently to the nation of Oceania, allowing unwanted and potentially threatening notions to be literally unthinkable. The monolithic vocabulary that emerges from this telescoped dictionary of dictatorship was common to the Totalitarianism of Orwells time in which the lexicon was contracted to the smallest number of syllables to ensure words are uttered without taking almost any thought, from the simple gestapo of the Nazi regime to Commintem of Communist International, both akin to Ingsoc Oceanias name for English Socialism. As Orwell feverishly states in his essay Politics and the English Language: If thoughts can corrupt language, language can corrupt thought. If an objection to the language, as depicted through Winstons keeping of a diary, is a signal of rebellion, then the forced adoption of an alien language may be seen as the suppression of identity and individual expression.

In which case we are forced to consider the current situation of English as a global language, that as more and more native languages become extinct and political discussion is engulfed by the English language are we not endangering the identity of thousands?

Though Big Brother has transcended into the comic consumption of other peoples thoughts and behaviours, darker currents of surveillance today swell beneath the surface. As the most watched country in the world, are we within the omniscient observance of Oceania even today? Surveillance sweeps the UK and the Investigatory Powers Act passed only last November, that legalized numerous hacking possibilities from the security services, was dubbed by Edward Snowden on Twitter, the most extreme surveillance in the history of Western democracy. It goes further than many autocracies. This kind of law is unparalleled by any other Western nation and in its enforcement, people can hear the eerie echoes of Himmlers Gestapos footsteps on every corner, they can see the two-way screens that litter the streets of Orwells Oceania, omnisciently watching and listening.

Orwells novel is a readable reminder of the threat that alternative facts place on democracy to those living in an age that just presumes democracy will prevail. Living in the technological era, Orwells fears of a fluctuating language have transpired in our ability to write, rewrite and delete language for our benefit. And so almost 70 years after its publication, the watchful eye of the Thought Police still looms over our heads, behind the pictures that hang above our beds.

Photograph: Wyrd & Wanderful via Flickr

See the article here:

Are we living in an Orwellian Oceania? - Palatinate

Oceania to Sail New World Cruise in 2019 – Travel Agent

Posted on by

Aboard Oceania Cruises'Insignia, the Around the World voyage sails more than 45,000 nautical miles across two oceans and 16 seas, while visiting 90 destinations in 36 countries. The voyage will depart from New York on January 11, 2019; Miami on January 14, 2019; and Los Angeles on January 30, 2019.

The voyage begins by sailing to the islands of Hawaii and the South Pacific before heading to New Zealand and Australia. From there, guests aboard the Insignia will travel to Asia, various locations throughout the Mediterranean, Canada and Bermuda.

Additionally, the itinerary has 14 overnight stays, including: Bali, Indonesia; Hong Kong, China; Yangon, Myanmar; and Luxor, Egypt. For guests booked on one of the full world cruises, the Around the World journey will also include a host of free exclusive shore events in Tokyo, Japan; Jerusalem, Israel; and Bordeaux,France.

Our exciting 2019 Around the World Journey offers guests an expertly crafted route spanning the four corners of the globe, touching on nearly 100 captivating destinations and dozens of UNESCO World-Heritage sites, said Bob Binder, president and CEO of Oceania Cruises. Its truly the journey of a lifetime. The added convenience of three departures, new for 2019, brings guests greater flexibility and can help simplify their travel plans.

The Insignia caters to guests with 400 professionally trained staff, four open-seating gourmet restaurants, and 342 staterooms and suites. Oceania Cruises world journey also includes an array of valuable amenities including: free first class roundtrip airfare along with the Exclusive Prestige Package, perks such as free pre-paid gratuities, free onboard medical care and free laundry service.

Visit http://www.oceaniacruises.com

Visit link:

Oceania to Sail New World Cruise in 2019 - Travel Agent

Oceania cruises around the world in 180 days | Cruise News UK – Travel Daily Media (press release) (registration) (blog)

Posted on by

Oceania Cruises has unveiled details of a new world voyage which is set to circumnavigate the globe in 180 days.

Scheduled to depart in January 2019, the world cruise will see the 684-passenger cruise ship, Insignia, sail more than 45,000 nautical miles (83,000km) across two oceans and 16 seas, visiting 90 destinations in 36 countries.

Having departed New York on 11 January 2019, the cruise will sail to Miami and through the Caribbean Sea and Panama Canal to Los Angeles. It will then sail across the Pacific to Hawaii, South Pacific, New Zealand and Australia, before heading north to Asia.

Following visits to countries including Indonesia, Hong Kong, Japan, Myanmar and India, the ship will then travel west to Egypt and the Holy Land, and then onwards through the Suez Canal to Europe.

The journey includes 14 overnight stays and a series of shore excursions. The 2019 world cruise opened for reservations this week.

The rest is here:

Oceania cruises around the world in 180 days | Cruise News UK - Travel Daily Media (press release) (registration) (blog)